Sorry Jim, but in my mind, there's a huge difference between a Maverick and a Mustang. Now, if you're talking about the mid 70's Mustang II, then I might agree.
--- On Wed, 7/1/09, The Masons <masonjs at nrtco.net> wrote:
From: The Masons <masonjs at nrtco.net>
Subject: Re: trailer question
To: "Dave Daniels" <dwaynedaniels at sbcglobal.net>, "David Beard" <davidebeard at comcast.net>, "GPZ LIST" <gpzlist at micapeak.com>
Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 9:01 AM
Isn't that just a fancified Maverick?
Ah yes the poor man's Mustang--the Maverick Grabber with a 302 CID V8 and less than mediocre brakes- for $2650.00 in 1972 you had some go (in a straight line) but not much whoa.
The only way to get more death for your dollar was a 340 Plymouth Duster for $2700.00 add another $150.00 for an AM radio and positraction. Posi was $50.00, the radio was $100.00. It had skinny 14" tires you could light up in every gear. Right out of the box it was a bugger to go.
Jim
> Any get rid of the "Stang"? Ain't no way he's doin' that.
>